Back
to top
alevel psychology
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
so in psychology you have 16 markers where you outline and evaluate stuff
in the evaluation you usually have a structure of point, evidence, explain and link - with the evidence do you HAVE to cite a study or could it be just like a theory someone had or something for example
hope that makes sense
in the evaluation you usually have a structure of point, evidence, explain and link - with the evidence do you HAVE to cite a study or could it be just like a theory someone had or something for example
hope that makes sense
0
reply
(Original post by Noodlzzz)
Yes. You need to give studies to any theory or idea you comment on.
Yes. You need to give studies to any theory or idea you comment on.
(again i hope that makes sense)
0
reply
Report
#4
(Original post by yazksj)
okay i was just wondering because im looking at a study right now and on the evaluation in the textbook, one of the points there's no specific study for the evidence, so would i cite the original study that its evaluating - considering its the same guy who did the study and who suggested the evaluation point
(again i hope that makes sense)
okay i was just wondering because im looking at a study right now and on the evaluation in the textbook, one of the points there's no specific study for the evidence, so would i cite the original study that its evaluating - considering its the same guy who did the study and who suggested the evaluation point
(again i hope that makes sense)
0
reply
Report
#5
More information would be helpful but I would say this:
Evaluating a theory requires you to think about the following:
Does it adequately describe what it is trying to do?
Does it adequately explain what it is trying to do or are there gaps in its explanatory account?
Does it have predictive power ie were its predictions supported in the findings/outcomes of a study?
Does it have practical application/implications?
Evaluating a theory requires you to think about the following:
Does it adequately describe what it is trying to do?
Does it adequately explain what it is trying to do or are there gaps in its explanatory account?
Does it have predictive power ie were its predictions supported in the findings/outcomes of a study?
Does it have practical application/implications?
1
reply
(Original post by wispyweetabix)
what study are you looking at?
what study are you looking at?
bowlby is the one who suggested the idea, so would i cite his original study if i was to use it in an evaluation point ?
0
reply
Report
#7
(Original post by yazksj)
its bowlby's monotropic attachment theory (1969) - and the evaluation point im looking at is whether attachment is adaptive.
bowlby is the one who suggested the idea, so would i cite his original study if i was to use it in an evaluation point ?
its bowlby's monotropic attachment theory (1969) - and the evaluation point im looking at is whether attachment is adaptive.
bowlby is the one who suggested the idea, so would i cite his original study if i was to use it in an evaluation point ?
and you want to say that Bowlby's theory shows that attachment is adaptive ( or not)
but then you'll need other research support for your point.
I hope this kind of makes sense since I don't remember using a researcher I did AO1 on to support an evaluation point in AO3
1
reply
Report
#8
Theories don’t show anything. They describe or predict.
Ask yourself, does Bowlby’s theory overlap with this idea or does it diverge from it? Point I didn’t get to mention in previous post (pressed send too soon) is that other theories are sometimes a better fit to the available evidence or have better predictive power etc.
Ask yourself, does Bowlby’s theory overlap with this idea or does it diverge from it? Point I didn’t get to mention in previous post (pressed send too soon) is that other theories are sometimes a better fit to the available evidence or have better predictive power etc.
0
reply
Report
#9
Evaluation points don’t have to include evidence. However, it’s all about building an argument. If I lived with you and said I thought we should start doing an online shop because it would save time you may not be be fully convinced. But, if I added ‘flat 29 have been doing it since spring and have all told me they have so much more free time’, then you would read into it more. It’s all about showing the examiner you know what you’re talking about.
The most important thing with evaluation is to explain your points thoroughly. Dig deep. Anyone can list 5 advantages and disadvantages, few students are able to give 1 and explain it thoroughly whilst making sure it specifically answers the question.
The most important thing with evaluation is to explain your points thoroughly. Dig deep. Anyone can list 5 advantages and disadvantages, few students are able to give 1 and explain it thoroughly whilst making sure it specifically answers the question.
1
reply
(Original post by wispyweetabix)
okay so your point would either agree or disagree that attachment is adaptive
and you want to say that Bowlby's theory shows that attachment is adaptive ( or not)
but then you'll need other research support for your point.
I hope this kind of makes sense since I don't remember using a researcher I did AO1 on to support an evaluation point in AO3
okay so your point would either agree or disagree that attachment is adaptive
and you want to say that Bowlby's theory shows that attachment is adaptive ( or not)
but then you'll need other research support for your point.
I hope this kind of makes sense since I don't remember using a researcher I did AO1 on to support an evaluation point in AO3
1
reply
(Original post by Joe Frazier)
Evaluation points don’t have to include evidence. However, it’s all about building an argument. If I lived with you and said I thought we should start doing an online shop because it would save time you may not be be fully convinced. But, if I added ‘flat 29 have been doing it since spring and have all told me they have so much more free time’, then you would read into it more. It’s all about showing the examiner you know what you’re talking about.
The most important thing with evaluation is to explain your points thoroughly. Dig deep. Anyone can list 5 advantages and disadvantages, few students are able to give 1 and explain it thoroughly whilst making sure it specifically answers the question.
Evaluation points don’t have to include evidence. However, it’s all about building an argument. If I lived with you and said I thought we should start doing an online shop because it would save time you may not be be fully convinced. But, if I added ‘flat 29 have been doing it since spring and have all told me they have so much more free time’, then you would read into it more. It’s all about showing the examiner you know what you’re talking about.
The most important thing with evaluation is to explain your points thoroughly. Dig deep. Anyone can list 5 advantages and disadvantages, few students are able to give 1 and explain it thoroughly whilst making sure it specifically answers the question.
0
reply
(Original post by giella)
Theories don’t show anything. They describe or predict.
Ask yourself, does Bowlby’s theory overlap with this idea or does it diverge from it? Point I didn’t get to mention in previous post (pressed send too soon) is that other theories are sometimes a better fit to the available evidence or have better predictive power etc.
Theories don’t show anything. They describe or predict.
Ask yourself, does Bowlby’s theory overlap with this idea or does it diverge from it? Point I didn’t get to mention in previous post (pressed send too soon) is that other theories are sometimes a better fit to the available evidence or have better predictive power etc.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
